Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Case Reports
. 2017 Apr-Jun;6(2):82-84.
doi: 10.1016/j.gmit.2016.11.003. Epub 2016 Dec 13.

Expectant management for abdominal pregnancy

Affiliations
Case Reports

Expectant management for abdominal pregnancy

Koji Yasumoto et al. Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther. 2017 Apr-Jun.

Abstract

This is the first English language report describing the expectant management for abdominal pregnancy. The patient was a 31-year-old multiparous woman who was transferred to our hospital on suspicion of ectopic pregnancy. Her serum human chorionic gonadotropin was positive, and a poorly-vascularized mass measuring about 4 cm was visualized in the Douglas pouch by transvaginal ultrasonography, as well as by pelvic magnetic resonance imaging. Because the bilateral adnexa were apparently intact, she was diagnosed with abdominal pregnancy, and expectant management was commenced. Unexpectedly, the mass remained in situ for nearly 3 years after her serum human chorionic gonadotropin tested negative. Laparoscopic removal of the mass was finally required because of persistent defecation pain. This case illustrates that some abdominal pregnancies can be managed expectantly, as is the case with tubal pregnancies. During the expectant management, however, it should be considered that the abdominal pregnancy mass may persist for a longer period and cause moderate symptoms necessitating surgical removal.

Keywords: MRI; defecation pain; ectopic pregnancy; laparoscopy; transvaginal ultrasonography.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest relevant to this article.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at her initial visit. (A) A 37-mm-sized mass (arrows) is delineated in the Douglas pouch. (B) Note that the mass lacks contrast enhancement.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Intraoperative findings at laparoscopy. A finger-sized, smooth, white mass is observed in the Douglas pouch (arrow). The mass is firmly adhered to the rectum.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Atrash HK, Friede A, Hogue CJ. Abdominal pregnancy in the United States: frequency and maternal mortality. Obstet Gynecol. 1987;69(3 Pt 1):333–337. - PubMed
    1. Dover RW, Powell MC. Management of a primary abdominal pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995;172:1603–1604. - PubMed
    1. Ginath S, Malinger G, Golan A, Shahmurov M, Glezerman M. Successful laparoscopic treatment of a ruptured primary abdominal pregnancy. Fertil Steril. 2000;74:601–602. - PubMed
    1. Varma R, Mascarenhas L, James D. Successful outcome of advanced abdominal pregnancy with exclusive omental insertion. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003;21:192–194. - PubMed
    1. Kitade M, Takeuchi H, Kikuchi I, Shimanuki H, Kumakiri J, Kinoshita K. A case of simultaneous tubal-splenic pregnancy after assisted reproductive technology. Fertil Steril. 2005;83:1042. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources